To think that Buckingham Palace SHOULDN'T have named Prince Andrew's accuser?

[aermingers]

I've just heard on the news that Buckingham Palace has named the person who has accused Prince Andrew of sex crimes against her. I can't find any confirmation online. But is it just me who thinks this is deeply wrong? Okay it may be technically legal because she's making the allegations in the US - but surely as potentially the victim of a sex crime they should have the decency not to name her? I'm really shocked, it just smacks of malice. And they can't even be certain she's not telling the truth.

"If she lied about that how can anything else she says be believed?" is his question."

Indeed Saltire. And what is the answer?

Maybe we should ask, oh fuck, who do I mean, oh you know, thingy. It's on the tip of my tongue. You know, Whatjamcalliit. Oh that's right MythicalKings.

'I believe him because he's a very respected man and he sounded really angry.'

MythicalKings - how old are you?

Or maybe you should just read all of the thread in the first place.

Inkanta - none of your business. How passive aggressive are you? Don't bother to answer that it was rhetorical.

Saltire

Peace

I'm not sure what the law is in the U.S., it would be illegal here.

Mythical - you sound quite young and naive - believing powerful men.

I am not sure either but to even be at these parties is dubious.

I am surprised at the extensive coverage post Leveson and even more at teh Palace denial which is unprecedented.

I am amazed that anyone is amazed when rich powerful people do whatever the fuck they like and expect to get away with it.

I have no idea what the truth in this case might be, but in general, I don't understand why people think that eg a wealthy lawyer or a member of the royal household or a major rockstar or whoever wouldn't behave badly / criminally.

Clearly people with lots of money power and influence are in a great position to be able to do whatever the fuck they like and usually get away with it and obviously some of them are going to have tastes which are unethical / illegal / etc. Why does this surprise people

Lot of people seem to WANT him to be guilty as part of a Non-Royalty agenda.

Let's wait until the DM decides.

What confuses me is that members of the royal family have security with them at all times, so if one of them was with a minor, surely one of their security team would intervene or report it, even if their job were at risk.

I personally think the girl is talking a lot of BS but I do agree that Andrew (and also Harry) mix with the wrong people.

Their security are masters of discretion and wouldn't dare step out of line. It is not anti royalty at all it is a long overdue examining of the behaviour of those we bloody pay for in teh whole establishment who have been getting away literally in some cases with murder for decades.

I don't want him to be guilty or not but do admit a certain pleasure in seeing establishment figures squirm and a general demystifying of these bloody people who are just where they are through an accident of birth. This is why I loved Diana she was the first nail in their coffin and it may take years but she won't be the last

The Royal security missed Saviles activities especially considering his close relationship with Charles and the amount of info different police stations had on him.

I wouldnt rate them very highly unless they admit that nobody is screened when they are that close to the Royals including the future King

I believe people who I don't know to be proven liars, Inkanta. You sound as though you haven't read much about the case.

they shouldn't have done that!! by the same virtue i don't think names of the accused should be released either. whether they are princes or tv presenters or bin men. not until they have been found guilty.

Maybe they didn't miss Saviles antics. Lots of people admitted it was an open secret they would be no different.

Mythical - Well stop it! going round blindly believing what powerful men say just because they are not known to be 'proven liars'. Have an open mind.

Agree with you noddy it may have been seen as a "pecadillo" that one turned a blind eye to. Plenty of people did, after all.

On subject of royal family, like any other powerful wealthy institution, they will not want anything coming out that might look bad for them, and will go to great lengths to protect the senior people in the organisation.

Again, am surprised that people seem to assume they will operate on some immaculate standard of behaviour. Why? Clearly statistically they aren't all going to be lovely, and they have the power and wealth to do pretty much whatever they like.

I mean can anyone even imagine the Met prosecuting one of them for something serious? Answer = no.

Don't they probably have some kind of legal immunity, I wouldn't be surprised?

I don't blindly believe women who sell stories of rape to the newspapers or who write their "memoirs". I think that means my mind is fairly open.

I have little time for the royal family, I'm a republican, but I have even less time for women who make up stories about rape and abuse. Each lie they tell makes it harder for a genuine rape victim to tell her story and be believed.

Statistically you would be right much much more of the time believing women and girls (and men and boys) who say they have been raped / had sex crimes committed against them, than believing the men who say they didn't do it.

Just FYI.

If they aren't trying to make money out of lies about abuse then I would believe them 99% of the time.

Yes omni is right the stats swing waaay more in favour of the accusers.